What if the Germans had won World War 2?

[Dimentio]

This is the classical question, and I think I do have have the answer. Even though Nazi Germany was a radical reactionary state, it shared some features with socialist one-party states, namely a that a party ruled over the society through the military forces and the security services.

I think that after Hitler's death, the nazi party would either have become marginalised, or become more "moderate", and that the post-Hitler leaders had focused on a gradual democratisation process, as well as a deconstruction or reformation of nazi values, to better adapt the reich to economic reality. The people of Germany had probably begun to dissent in the 1960;s consumer boom, because better wealth will always generate a demand for more democracy. The German corporations, eager to trade with the UK and the USA, would have pushed for democratisation.

In short, after Hitler's death to 1975, Germany would have moved from a totalitarian state to an authoritarian state, and in 1975-1990 from an authoritarian state to a bourgeoisie liberal state, probably ushered by a (slightly different) 1968.

In short, we would have lived in a European Union under German hegemony, but Germany would not have been much more authoritarian than the USA.

[gilhyle]

Havent you left out the bit about de-populating Eastern Europe and Russia so tht vast German latifundia could be established ? And with Erope as a German trade region, Britain would have sought to retain its Empire.....and what would have happened to the US....guess the Munroe doctrine woudl ahve taken on a new meaning.

[Dimentio]

The British colonies would probably have fought for independence. Russia would probably have looked quite fucked up had the Germans won the WW2.

What reason would the USA have had to conquer Latin America, which they already controlled?

[Comrade Rage]

I think Germany would have grown a lot more reactionary after the death of Hitler because of his successors: Reichsfuehrer-SS Heinrich Himmler, Martin Bormann, or Marshal of the Luftwaffe Hermann Goering. These people were just as ruthless as Hitler, if not more.

Not to mention the fact that had Germany's conquest of Russia gone as planned, Reinhard Heydrich might not have been assigned to; then assassinated in Czechoslovakia. That man would have turned Germany into a much bigger hell.

[Dimentio]

Heydrich and Goering were probably too smart not to be pragmatic against the military. Himmler would have gone Beria's destiny, because he was despised and feared by the army. Goebbels would also have been marginalised quite quickly.

My bet would have been that one general would have taken over.

Moreover, a regime could not maintain it's ideological purity during "good" post-war times. The growing middle class of Germany had used the workers as a mean to get political influence, and demand more democracy, probably together with pragmatic elements of the state.

The same thing has happened in other totalitarian/authoritarian states throughout the 20th century, of which some I claim were equivalent with Nazi Germany in brutality and fanaticism.

[Dimentio]

For a fun anecdote, the main villain in my book is actually somewhat inspired by Reinhard Heydrich (merged with Qin Shi Huang Di, Vlad the Impaler and the Buddha).

[Comrade Rage]

But how would Nazi Germany have become more moderate with organizations like the Hitler Youth and SD? I think that had WWII gone better for the Germans, Rommel or Heydrich would have been the successor, but even with Rommel being (probably) the least authoritarian famous German general of the time, he would have to keep towing the Nazi party line or risk assassination.

[Comrade Rage]

For a fun anecdote, the main villain in my book is actually somewhat inspired by Reinhard Heydrich (merged with Qin Shi Huang Di, Vlad the Impaler and the Buddha).Sounds interesting. What's the title?

[Dimentio]

But how would Nazi Germany have become more moderate with organizations like the Hitler Youth and SD? I think that had WWII gone better for the Germans, Rommel or Heydrich would have been the successor, but even with Rommel being (probably) the least authoritarian famous German general of the time, he would have to keep towing the Nazi party line or risk assassination.

How could Stalin's Soviet become more moderate with organisations like the Komsomol and the NKVD?

Actually, in Nazi Germany, it would have gone even quicker, since Nazi Germany had very large private companies, with an interest in creating a vibrant consumer class (possibly utilising an apartheid-like system in the east). And the Nazi Party without Hitler would soon have been in a full civil war making the conflicts in the CPSU 1953-1954 look like a child's game.

[Comrade Rage]

You may be on to something, although I believe that the SD was a little more efficient and ruthless, as it only focused on Nazi Party members, dissent by the general populace was handled by the Gestapo. The NKVD had to divide it's attention between the public and the Party.

[Dimentio]

You may be on to something, although I believe that the SD was a little more efficient and ruthless, as it only focused on Nazi Party members, dissent by the general populace was handled by the Gestapo. The NKVD had to divide it's attention between the public and the Party.

One could look on it the other way as well. The SS, the SD and the various security organs (like Bormann's and Goering's semi-private security services), were not likely to stay idle if their leader had seemed to lose the power struggle.

[Comrade Rage]

You may be on to something, although I believe that the SD was a little more efficient and ruthless, as it only focused on Nazi Party members, dissent by the general populace was handled by the Gestapo. The NKVD had to divide it's attention between the public and the Party.
One could look on it the other way as well. The SS, the SD and the various security organs (like Bormann's and Goering's semi-private security services), were not likely to stay idle if their leader had seemed to lose the power struggle.You're right, I was forgetting about the semi-private forces that the upper-echelon was keeping.

BTW, around what year do you think Hitler would have bitten the dust? I'm figuring 1960/62, due to his poor health and diet.

[Dimentio]

Possibly even earlier. I think around 1960 sounds reasonable.

[SamiBTX]

Eventually the government would've been overthrown.
The harder you push down on the people, the harder they hit you back.
But even non-Nazi conquered nations of Europe would be dramatically
different than they are today. Assuming they had not ended up with all of Europe in their hands. Would the "Cold War" have been between 3 nations instead of 2? The US & USSR where allies during WWII, would they have remained so if the Germans were the victors?
A good thing that could've come out of it (and most likely the only the good thing) is that America's main political phobia would've been of something with a real threat.
Maybe America would've aspired to become a true democratic state,
a peacemaker instead of a global reakoning force.
But that's definetly a maybe. The fate of the Soviet Union could've have been something else too, not the same as it was but either worse or better. Maybe they would've become much more of a true Marxist state, or maybe they would've just existed to combat a cold war with the German conquered Europe.
But I have no idea what would've happened had Germany conquered ALL
of Europe & North Africa.

Okay, I'm talking too much. I'll shut-up.

[Jimmie Higgins]

In short, after Hitler's death to 1975, Germany would have moved from a totalitarian state to an authoritarian state, and in 1975-1990 from an authoritarian state to a bourgeoisie liberal state, probably ushered by a (slightly different) 1968.

Despite the USSR and U.S. being imperialistic and using exploitation and repression, I think there is a difference between either USSR state-capitalism and NAZIism or US Bourgeois-Democracy and NAZIism.

The NAZIs had a stated goal of destroying all worker-organizations and opposition parties. The USSR never started out to do this and so it always had come up with excuses for becoming a one-party state or pretend there was more democracy than there really was. In the US, there is the 2 party system that pretends it is democratic at the same time the ruling class through the Republicans and Democrats use the courts, the media, and other parts of the "superstructure" to ideologically and legislatively destroy opposition parties (like the Green Party and Nader or the Populist party and early attempts at Labor parties) and uses the police to physically destroy radical groups like the IWW or the Panthers.

In the 60s, the reform movements often came out of the discrepancy between the stated goals of the US and USSR and the realities of life in these systems. So the civil rights movement in the US didn't start with Black Power, it started with people trying to win their basic bourgeois rights. In the eastern block, rebellions in the 50s in Poland and notably in 1956 Hungary started as reform movements.

What kind of "reform movement" could exist in fascism? "Hey-hey, ho-ho, all opposition parties have got to go?" No, any opposition to fascism would have to be like the resistance that existed in NAZI controlled countries or the antifas.

Would the US or the USSR have done business with NAZI-Europe if there had been a tri-polar settlement to end WWII? Definitely! It would have made things really interesting and scary in the US because the right would be emboldened by Hitler's example.

[Dimentio]

In Nazi Germany, there was probably less domestic political repression than in Franco's Spain. Opposition usually springs up at the top of the system, as well as around the grassroots.

[RNK]

I think that's an uninformed statement to make. There may have physically been less repression than in Spain, but only because by 1939 all political grassroots opposition had been wiped out.

Had Germany won, it probably would've played out in a similar manner to Franco's Spain, with some very important differences, first and foremost was the ultra-imperialistic nature of Nazi Germany and the radical racism of Nazism.

First, they would have pursued their hunt for jews across the entire planet and more than likely would wipe them out entirely. Secondly, hundreds of millions would have been subjugated into forced enslavement. While Europe proper would most likely be merged into a Greater Reich, and perhaps shared a rather moderate totalitarianistic society, elsewhere, such as in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, there would be utter devestation and exploitation which would make the American Slave Trade look like a schoolyard fight. Great columns of transport vessels would constantly import slave labour into European concentration camps. Perhaps every German family would enjoy the ownership of an "untermensch" labourer imported from slavic or eastern european areas.

I don't think it would have fizzled out and liberalized over the course of a few generations. A few centuries, maybe. I think a lot of people misunderstand the nature of the opposition towards Hitler from the German High Command. First, this was not liberal opposition to a radical ideology. Through-and-through, the High Command were extremely patriotic, nationalist leaders and it is from this tendency that most of the opposition originated. Most of the Generals that opposed Hitler did so because they saw his rule as a threat to Germany itself, a reality that became more apparent as the war progressed and as Germany began suffering defeat after defeat. If Germany had won the war, this would be a moot point, and this opposition would not have occured.

Also take into account the fact that even up to the end, as Germany was burning and Allied armies drove through the heart of the Reich almost unopposed, the vast majority of the High Command still had complete allegience to Hitler. Those that did not, more often than not, committed suicide. A minority accepted defeat. Rommel, for instance, when approached with the plan in late 1944 to depose Hitler, refused to take part, as he considered the removal of Hitler irrelevent.

So I don't think any coup d'etat was feasible, especially if Germany had won. Hitler's hand-crafted ultra-zealous youth would have carried on the torch for decades.

[F9]

if they had won their hierarchy wouldnt stand for a long time.I think that when the people just dont like what they have they would stand up and fight nazi-german and as a result it would collapse!I think it would be on the people hands,on our hands leftists!:star:

[Red_or_Dead]

One of the possibilites would be that after the Nazi Germany would fully recuperate from the war, it would start to spread its system, in a similar way that the US has been doing since the end of WW2. My guess is that the first in line would be the fascist regimes that were Hitlers allies in the war, but were independant (Finland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria...). I dont think that all of them would be prepared to accept Germanys rule, and that might lead to another war or two, tho I think that none of these countries would have much chances against the German army.

Then there would be countries that were neutral in the war, like Switzerland, Sweden, Ireland, Spain... Germany could influence National Socialist movements in those countries, and therefore even expanding its rule, except in Spain, of course, where they already had a fascist government in place.

Also, it would be interesting to see how the relations between Italy and Germany would develop after the war, would they countinue as allies, or would they become rivals?

I dont think that all of the Nazi occupied Europe would be merged into a single Reich. My guess is that after the victors would take their shares of the occupied territories, they would go on to form a pact, in a similar way as the Warsaw pact, or NATO.

In any case, its a good thing that we are just discussing those things. I for one wouldnt want to live in the above described Europe!

[Colonello Buendia]

if they had won their hierarchy wouldnt stand for a long time.I think that when the people just dont like what they have they would stand up and fight nazi-german and as a result it would collapse!I think it would be on the people hands,on our hands leftists!:star:


you have to remember that Hitler ruthlessly suppressed the left within Germany and if he had one and created a major Empire, there wouldn't be enough leftists left. plus you wouldn't be able to find the literature so learning about it would be impossible. however, I'm sure some people would be desperate for change so they may have resisted but that wouldn't have lasted for very long methinks

[F9]

as i am coming from a country which a lot of gongueros had passed over it(europeans,asians,muslims etc) but it didnt change its identity,i think that hitler wouldnt be able to destroy all leftists.Maybe they would be forced to hide their political-statement but they would continue to be leftists and aftes some time when they didnt stand it anymore they would organise!thats theoritically ofcourse from my mind!:star:

[gilhyle]

I think some of this discussion really misses what was at stake in WW2. What Hitler advocated was geographically integrated self-sufficiency of a single goegraphical area and cultural homgeneity. that is why his policy would have led to a radical regionalisation of the world. In the absence of the USSR, the whole independence movement would have failed. Britain would have become an independent variable between the US and Germany. The transformation of Eastern Europe and Russia west of the Urals would have been radical - all those people were to be enslaved or killed. The falling productivity that occured during the war in France and elsewhere in western europe would have continued. France, Scandanavia, Netherland Belgium would have been partially de-industrialised. The US would have had no choice but to enforce the kind of policy it applied anyway in Latin America - but much more ruthlessly. The German approach of deeply aggressive colonial aggression would have become the norm.

There was a thriller film/book some years ago set in a vicotrious Germany which proposed a similar model of a moderating dictatorship, obviously influenced by what happened in Spain. But the better model might well be Orwells 1984.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ "Fatherland"? [Good film, BTW]

[Niemand]

As this is all purely speculative, no perceived future can truly be discounted, but it is of my opinion that Nazi Germany's victory would have been impossible. Should the USSR have fallen, the Soviet people would still prove to be a strong force against the Nazi oppressors. Although, if they were indeed to succumb to German might, then it is quite possible that the Reich would have expanded until it eventually collapsed under its own weight much like the Roman Empire did. How long would it have taken for that to happen? One can only speculate. By and large, I think Comrade RNK's idea holds most water.

[R_P_A_S]

We would had real socialism taking place in some parts of the world. because the more oppressed and fucked up people are the quicker they mobilize.

[Invader Zim]

This kind of counter-factual history, while interesting, is ultimately fruitless.

That said, the Nazi regime would have collapsed without Hitler. The cult of the individual was what the regime was built around. Hitler's inner-circle were largely despised by the German people and were often blamed by the German people for various problems within the regime, as opposed to Hitler who was in many quarters thought to be unable to do wrong.

There is a whole miniature school of history dedicated to the intentionalist ideal that Hitler structured his subordinates in such a way that they were utterly reliant upon him in order to be maintained, that they were constantly at each others throats and utterly incapable of mounting a realistic body of strength and support to possibly challenge Hitler’s authority. So had Germany won the war, and Hitler kicked the bucket due to natural causes I think the Nazi regime would have imploded.

[LSD]

So had Germany won the war, and Hitler kicked the bucket due to natural causes I think the Nazi regime would have imploded.

Or more likely exploded, into tiny little pieces all scattered across the new empire's map. The Grossedeutchlande expansion was unsustainable, even Hitler knew that. He undoubtably would have been satisfied with independent, but weak, dutch and belgique states, probably even a France. We know that he preferred an independent Switzerland, Romania, Yugoslavia, Hungaria, etc.. (provided they fell in line of course).

But there's really very little data on just what Russia would have become following a Nazi victory. It's ambiguous as to whether Hitler intended on expanding German posessions, or drawing up coloinial regimes, or establishing settler colonial states, or even complete repopulation.

In short, we don't know what would have happened because in all likelyhood Hitler didn't know. He hadn't planned that far ahead yet. He was still looking forward to that particular task when he died. But he did have four good years of active occupation in the west to show us what he intended for Europe, and so we can be pretty confident in concluding that his evnetual ambition, insofar as western Europe was concerned at least, was in insuring German economic domination and the elimation of the jews.

Save that, he didn't seem to care how people chose to organize themselves under him, so long as he was in charge.

If Hitler had won and died, I'd imagine that the world would look very much like it does today, minus a couple million odd jews and slavs. Most of what defines our existence is economic, not politicical, and the economic story would have stayed the same. I don't know what nation-state would be dominant in a post-ANTI-WW2 universe, but I can guarantee that it would be based in either western Europe or the Americas; because ultimately, materialism moves us all.

[Dr Mindbender]

Back in the 80's they made a movie and book with this thread's title as it's theme. It was called 'fatherland', and was set in an alternative 'what if' 1960's Germania.

EDIT:
Here is a clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzcqf6ycHzw

oh yeah someones mentioned this already, lol whoops
heres the clip anyway